The idea that The New York Times is giving voice to a guy who is a serious, respected conservative intellectual — and somehow that’s a bad thing,” Rosenthal added. “How intolerant is that?”
Serious? He is seriously wrong on every issue he tackles. Respected? Not by anyone that actually fact checks his statements and track record. Conservative intelectual? FAAAAAR RIGHT WINGNUT UBER-NEOCONSERVATIVE, lightweight propagandist, and intellectual featherweight. And that is being generous.
Given Kristol's intolerance of facts and his taking a job at a paper he has derided for years, does Kristol look sillier OR does the NY Times look even sillier for adding another Judy Miller to their staff?
Crooks and Liars:
This will do little to convince their readers that he didn’t just make a huge mistake by hiring a pundit who has zero credibility and is one of the biggest hacks in all of wingnuttia. Mr. Rosenthal, it is not intolerant of the American people to want truth and accuracy from the supposed paper of record. It’s not about having opposing viewpoints, it’s that Kristol has been wrong on just about everything he’s said for the past five years. Not a little wrong, but really, really wrong. But according to Rosenthal, he’s really serious and gee, people really respect him. Well, I guess that makes up for all of theHackery? Nope! It is just more wingnut welfare for the chronically insane failures in the warmongering neoconservative GOP wet set.
propaganda… war-mongering partisanship…hackery that Kristol has been given a national platform for already.